| |
At 10:04 AM 11/25/1999 , Todd Lehman wrote:
> > > > I don't think it would be popular enough to be worth the
> > > > implimentation.
> > > If somebody wants to do the work, it is worth the work.
> > You're probably more right than I am here. Afterall, it promotes LDraw,
> > and the point of ldraw.org is a centralized resource.
>
> Reading the <http://www.ldraw.org/about/> page, I always thought it was just
> assumed (in the "commonly understood" sense) that the purpose of ldraw.org
> was to unify LDraw things that were specifically LEGO-related (i.e., not for
> non-LEGO stuff). But maybe that's just how I always read it, always assuming
> that the "L" in "LDraw" meant "LEGO" in some fundamental way.
I read that page and I don't recall 'Lego' being mentioned once. But your
interpretation is correct.
> > Not allowing non-Lego LDraw models on the site would be contradicting that
> > charter
>
> Hmm... Just a thought...is the text of the charter immutable?
The 'Centralized LDraw Resources' is, but the meaning behind it is subject
to change.
> > and encouraging the resources to spread out again.
>
> I wonder... Even if clones were not allowed on the site, wouldn't authors
> of new tools still submit copies of the tools? And why would you care if
> DAT files for clone brands were spread out?
>
> I think if ya wanna support clones at ldraw.org and be truly fair to all
> construction systems, ya gotta go whole hog and move all the LEGO related
> stuff down into a /lego/ subtree off the root...
Ewww! Ewww! Ewww! Ewww! Ewww! You've proven your point here, Todd
:) There is NO WAY the site will be reduced to that. LDraw was intended
to be for Lego brand models and officially I think it should stay that way.
(hmmmm got me in a bind here)
> > I *still* am adamantly against clones :)
>
> So, does hosting clone DAT files show support or disdain for clones? :)
It shows (and I hate the word) tolerance for them, which as a purist, is
intolerable. Though showing acceptance for clones can be sugar coated into
the promotion of the community, its abandoning the standards and the
devotion to the best of the best of building toys.
> What would you say to a site full of Mega-Bloks or K'NEX DAT files if they
> wanted to join the LDraw Webring? :)
Another good one. I would clearly deny them membership, with explanation.
> Although the DAT file format can be used to represent virtually any type of
> solid plastic toy, LDraw is and always has been for LEGO® brand construction
> toy elements (right?), and ldraw.org was set up specifically with LEGO® (not
> clones) in mind (right?).
It was set up with specifically Lego in mind, but at the time it was set
up, the thought of clones being modeled in LDraw was not an issue. It was
*assumed* to be the case that only Lego models would be made until people
started to color outside the lines. So there is no requirement to keep
ldraw.org 'pure,' but at the same time refusing to keep it pure would
dilute the intention of LDraw.
I'm kinda goin back on what I said about hosting clone stuff before, but
Todd brings up some critical points here. Lets focus on the Lego brand,
the original intention of LDraw.
Happy Thanksgiving!
-Tim
http://www.zacktron.com
http://www.ldraw.org
AIM: timcourtne
ICQ: 23951114
You know what you'll never see?? A fat Chinese man with flaming red hair
running full speed while taking a crap. -Tom Ace
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
64 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
